January 20, 2013

You are here: Home / Archives for Crime / Violence

Don’t Buy War! Freeze Flash Mob & Police Brutality in Austin, TX

December 12, 2011 By Leave a Comment

CodePink Austin, along with allies from Veteran’s for Peace and Women in Black staged a Don’t Buy War “freeze” at Barton Creek Mall on Saturday, December 3rd. The strategically chosen mall location was between the Santa photo station and the Gamestop store, which prominently advertises the ‘Modern Warfare 3′ video game.

The goals were to raise awareness about the continuing wars on Iraq and Afghanistan, to educate shoppers about the costs (both human and economic) of the wars, and to dissuade parents from purchasing war toys.

The creative action was well received by shoppers, and several veterans approached the group to thank us.

All was peaceful until mall security and APD arrived, and an APD officer brutally attacked a young woman who had joined the group spontaneously. She was seriously beaten and ended up with three cracked ribs and bruises all over her body.

 

Filed Under: Police, Protests, Tyranny, USA, Violence, War Tagged With:

Healers, Torture And National Security

December 11, 2011 By Leave a Comment

In 2004, the news that Americans had committed abuse and mistreatment in Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo was shocking. Even more alarming, were the revelations that physicians, psychiatrists, and other mental health professionals had assisted with interrogations that bordered on torture.

In the span of just two generations, the United States had drifted from condemning Nazi physicians at the Nuremberg Trials for their collusion with torture, inhuman experimentation and cruel mistreatment to justifying waterboarding in the pursuit of better intelligence.

As a retired brigadier general and Army psychiatrist, committed to a strong military and national defense, I find these scandals to be most disturbing. The complicity of psychiatrists and other physicians clearly deviated from the fundamental ethical principles of the medical profession and military medicine. My generation of soldiers, who had served during the Vietnam War, vowed not to repeat the misdeeds of the My Lai massacres and rampant indiscipline we witnessed.

However, after the attack on the World Trade Towers, fear and anger dominated the country’s emotional climate and the principles of our profession were hijacked. The incessant drumbeat of political rhetoric that “the war on terror is a war like no other” and that “we must take all measures possible to stop the enemy” made it somehow easier for psychiatrists to apply their skills and training to exploit the vulnerabilities of prisoners. To this day, former government officials justify cruel and inhuman treatment of detainees at Bagram and Guantanamo with unsubstantiated assertions that their confessions led to the trail of Osama bin Laden. The public supported such conduct and the television show “24″ gained wide popularity as viewers were captivated by threats of violence and new gimmicks for bringing the bad guys down. Even the presidential candidates in 2008 were ambushed by questions that judged their fitness to be commander in chief by their willingness to torture a suspect who planted a “ticking bomb.”

But, there is no evidence to confirm the assertions that torture of prisoners has helped the war effort at all.

The plain fact is that nothing that has been claimed in the name of defending our country can justify cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment of another man or woman. Torture, in any form - light or heavy - is not a tool of interrogation or useful for gathering good intelligence. It is a propaganda tool and degrades the perpetrator as well as the victim. This is not just the rhetoric of bleeding heart progressives. It is the opinion of over fifty retired admirals, generals and senior government officials convened by Human Rights First to discuss this issue, and our conclusions can be stated simply:

  • Torture Is Un-American. Gen. George Washington laid down the directive that American soldiers will treat the enemy humanely and conform to high moral & ethical principles on the battlefield.
  • Torture Is Ineffective. Experienced interrogators acknowledge that information extracted by the use of torture is unreliable.
  • Torture Is Unnecessary. Veteran FBI agents and military interrogators have spoken out publicly against the use of physical pressure in interrogation.
  • Torture Is Damaging. “… a person who is tortured is damaged, but so are the torturer, the nation and the military.“

Torture has long been associated with political repression and with regimes without any semblance of an independent judiciary or media. The Soviet Union’s imprisonment of dissenters and forced use of psychotropic medication on them, the Khmer Rouge’s torture of thousands of people in Cambodia and the Augusto Pinochet regime’s brutality against prisoners in Chile all bear witness to the association between totalitarian or authoritarian regimes and their use of torture.

As the human rights lawyer Leonard Rubenstein and I wrote in March 2010, “the medical staff at the C.I.A. and the Pentagon played a critical role in developing and carrying out torture procedures. Psychologists and at least one doctor designed or recommended coercive interrogation methods including sleep deprivation, stress positions, isolation and waterboarding. The military’s Behavioral Science Consultation Teams evaluated detainees, consulted their medical records to ascertain vulnerabilities and advised interrogators when to push harder for intelligence information. Psychologists designed a program for new arrivals at Guantánamo that kept them in isolation to ‘enhance and exploit’ their ‘disorientation and disorganization.’ Medical officials monitored interrogations and ordered medical interventions so they could continue even when the detainee was in obvious distress. In one case, an interrogation log obtained by Time magazine shows a medical corpsman ordered intravenous fluids to be administered to a dehydrated detainee even as loud music was played to deprive him of sleep.”

We cannot dismiss the psychiatrists and psychologists, who participated in interrogations in Guantanamo and helped devise the abusive practices, as mere rogues or outliers. They were actors on a much larger stage. They were swept up by a pervasive and persuasive attitude that subsumed the country and energized a military plan to “hunt down the criminals wherever they may be hiding.” The Department of Defense (DoD) issued policy accordingly and the Office of Assistant Secretary for Health Affairs contended that the legitimate objective of fighting terrorism trumps the ethical responsibility of the healing practitioner. In their eyes, “the ends justify the means” and a few brutalized prisoners were a small price to pay for protecting the citizens of the United States.

But, in truth, the use of torture and practices of cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment detracted from the military mission and compromised the international stature of our country, while also undermining the effectiveness, credibility and ethical foundations of the medical professionals. To a certain extent, the administration realizes this. Now, ten years into the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the White House has changed the national strategy and President Obama has insisted, “human rights is both fundamental to American leadership and a source of our strength in the world.” In his words, it “does not merely represent our better angels …” Standing up for human rights has come front and center both as a matter of national strategy and measure of human decency. Historically, the human rights stance against torture has been unequivocal, one of the few absolutes in human rights law: It is never permitted, never excused, never to be balanced against national needs or interests - even in cases of national emergency. Torture is also forbidden under the laws of war. It is considered a war crime under the Geneva Conventions.

This is important and good, but it is not enough. The political leadership of our nation does not have an appetite for investigating the misdeeds that were committed in the past ten years. A change for the better that is not informed by an honest assessment of the sins of the past is not likely to be either permanent or fully integrated into the power structure. Several human rights groups have called for a Commission of Truth and Reconciliation to spur corrective action. By this, they are referring to comprehensive programs that were undertaken in South Africa and in the former Soviet Union to bring to justice the perpetrators of misdeeds and examine the range of responsibility that society as a whole had for the injustices of the past. Mental health professionals understand the power of confession and repentance, for individuals, communities and institutions. Something is needed that goes beyond apology, regret or even a vow to do better. A Commission of Truth and Reconciliation is a step toward corrective action.

By reflecting on the ethical principles and traditions of the healing professions, a stronger case can be put forward against torture and mistreatment:

  • First, do no harm. The victims of torture and mistreatment breed political instability and discontent, weakening governments and societies.
  • Beneficence. Torture and mistreatment violate the intents and purposes of medical healers and participation in any way corrupts the ethical foundations of the practitioners and professions.
  • Professional role. Physicians are not interrogators, any more than they are fighter pilots or infantrymen. The military and other governmental agencies have other professionals to do those tasks and calling on physicians to fill such roles is irresponsible and ineffective.
  • Trust. Physicians enjoy special trust and confidence across almost all societies. That trust is undermined with participation in harmful, coercive and abusive conduct that is neither doctor-like nor appropriate.

In 1947, our nation and its allies tried and sentenced the Nazi physicians who violated basic principles of medical ethics. In 2003, the political dynamics and national sentiment induced physicians and psychiatrists and other health care professionals to commit actions that violated core ethics. The healing professions can lead corrective action, help the country recover the “high ground” and prevent future lapses in professional conduct and policies that violated human rights. Human rights are vital to national security in the 21st century.

Much has improved since the dark days of 9/11, but our nation has been damaged. Where once the symbol of our great democracy was the Statue of Liberty - it has now become the image of that poor hooded man in detention with wires strung from his hands and feet. Our men and women on the front lines are endangered because of the increased risk of retaliatory measures. We are not safer because of these misguided policies and how we have acted as a country.

1. I have recent experience that confirms my opinions on the ineffectiveness of harsh interrogation techniques, their unethical nature and harmful consequences. In the past five years, I have been asked to assess several detainees and review the medical records of many more on behalf of defense attorneys. Many detainees subjected to harsh interrogation, as designed and approved by clinicians working for the CIA and DoD, still suffer with the prolonged injuries and adverse psychological effects of their treatment. The evidence of negative effects of the harsh interrogations has been compelling. Moreover, the information gleaned in interrogations that involved harsh treatment has not been allowed in court proceedings.

 

Source: https://www.truth-out.org/healers-torture-and-national-security/1323104751

Filed Under: Torture, USA Tagged With:

Second Tibetan Monk Burns Himself to Death in Protest

December 11, 2011 By Leave a Comment

A Tibetan Buddhist monk protesting Chinese policies immolated himself publicly in a Tibetan area of Sichuan Province in southwest China on Monday, an outside advocacy group reported. It was the second such act in the area in the past five months and appeared to reflect resistance to increased Chinese repression of loyalty to Tibet’s exiled spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama.

The monk was heard calling, “We Tibetan people want freedom,” “Long live the Dalai Lama” and “Let the Dalai Lama return to Tibet,” after he drank gasoline, doused himself with it and set himself alight on a bridge in the center of Daofu, a town in Ganzi County in Sichuan, according to the advocacy group Free Tibet. The group is based in London, but has a network of contacts in Tibet and Tibetan-populated areas elsewhere in China.

Xinhua, China’s official news agency, reported the death of a monk in Daofu, but did not provide details.

Ganzi, known in Tibetan as Kardze, is overwhelmingly populated by ethnic Tibetans. It has been an area of chronic tensions for the Chinese authorities, most related to the country’s Han ethnic majority.

China’s government regards the vast Himalayan region of Tibet as an integral part of China and is sensitive to expressions of support for the Dalai Lama, who fled into exile in 1959 and who has accused China of stifling Tibetan culture. The Chinese consider the Dalai Lama a subversive advocate of Tibetan independence, although he has said he only wants greater autonomy for Tibet.

Stephanie Brigden, the director of Free Tibet, identified the monk who killed himself as Tsewang Norbu, 29. She said he was protesting what she described as the harsh treatment of Tibetans following the March 16 immolation by a monk from the Kirti monastery in Aba, or Ngaba in Tibetan, in the same region of Sichuan. She said the repression worsened further when Tibetans in Daofu and elsewhere defied a government ban on celebrating the Dalai Lama’s 76th birthday on July 6.

“We’ve basically seen an escalation in the clamping down,” she said in a telephone interview. “It is not just limited to this area.”

In a news release, Ms. Brigden said her group had “grave concerns” about what could happen in Daofu in the aftermath of the monk’s immolation, and at his monastery, Nyitso. She said that telephone and Internet access had been cut and that the group had “received reports that the army has surrounded the monastery.”

The resilient support for the Dalai Lama among China’s five million Tibetans has taken on increased significance with time. The Dalai Lama has said he may choose his own successor, deviating from the practice in which senior lamas identify each Dalai Lama’s reincarnation after his death. In response, Chinese authorities in Beijing have said they have the authority to name the next Dalai Lama. They have been seeking to promote their own handpicked successor, the Panchen Lama, second only to the Dalai Lama in the Tibetan Buddhist hierarchy.

The so-called Chinese Panchen Lama, who has spent most of his life in Beijing, went on a politically significant trip last week to a town that is home to a cherished monastery in a Tibetan-populated area of Gansu Province, where he was expected to study and meditate for weeks. Experts on Tibet said the trip appeared to have been part of the Chinese government’s attempt to give the Panchen Lama more legitimacy among monks and other Tibetans by broadening his exposure outside the capital.

 

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/16/world/asia/16tibet.html?_r=2&partner=MYWAY&ei=5065

Filed Under: China, Tibet, Torture Tagged With: ,

YouTube Keeps Censoring This Video. Download And Repost

December 9, 2011 By Leave a Comment

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55_bWwDVgbI&feature=related

RUSSIAN PRISONER ABUSE. ***IMAGES MAY BE DISTURBING***

Can see why they keep trying to ban this. The truth hurts doesn’t it? I can’t imagine what they do to them off camera in the prison camps.

But with the new Senate Bill S1867, this could be done to everyone in America. Did you know if you own more than 7 days worth of food in America now, you are on the watch list as a suspected terrorist? They can now arrest us all for far less and remove us to foreign prisons with no trial, no due process and keep us there until the day we die - whilst beating us constantly should they choose to do so.

 

Filed Under: Prison, Russia, Violence

Touching Video of Laboratory Beagles Released for First Time

December 4, 2011 By Leave a Comment

Millions of dogs each year are used as test subjects in order to study the effects of harmful pharmaceuticals, toxic household cleaners, and chemical-laden cosmetic products. A group known as Animal Rescue Media Education is dedicated to not only attempt to rescue science-lab dogs, but they also try and find them a home. In one of their largest rescue missions, the organization successfully rescued 72 beagles. With 32 already adopted by the time the press started picking up the story, the remaining 30 dogs were being nursed back to health.

In this touching video, watch as 9 rescued beagles are released from their cages for the first time. This is not only the first time they’ve seen sunlight, but the first time the animals are walking on solid ground.

“We’ve been told they lived one per cage in rooms of 10 beagles, but they never had any physical interaction with one another,” Smith said. “They’ve been in kennels since they were rescued about a week ago, but aside from that, they’ve spent most of their lives locked up.”

It is very easy to disregard animal testing as a real issue just as it is very simple to ignore international slave labor — it oftentimes simply does not affect you until you see it first hand. When you read product labels stating that the item was not tested on animals, it may mean very little to you.

Videos like these provide a wake-up call to the very cruel reality of animal testing and other forms of animal abuse.

It is important to consider how many other important issues are also disregarded due to the lack of immediate effect — particularly when it comes to your health. Perhaps the high-fructose corn syrup in your diet may not immediately harm you, but it may lead to disease later down the road.

If you are interested in adopting one of the dogs or supporting the organization responsible for rescuing the beagles, you can view their adoption page.

 

Filed Under: Animal Cruelty, Animal Rights, Science, Torture, Tyranny Tagged With: , ,

Legal for U.S. Govt to Execute Citizens Without Trial Abroad, Coming to U.S. Soil? (Video)

December 4, 2011 By Leave a Comment

Filed Under: Law, Martial Law, Military, Politics, Prison, Rights, Terrorism, Torture, Tyranny, USA Tagged With: ,

U.S. Says Americans Are MILITARY Targets in the War on Terror … And Says that Only the White House – and Not the Courts – Gets to Decide Who Is a Legitimate Target

December 4, 2011 By Leave a Comment

American Citizens on U.S. Soil May be Indefinitely Detained, Sent to Guantanamo or Assassinated

As everyone realizes by now, Congress’ push for indefinite detention includes American citizens on American soil. As Huffington post notes:

The debate also has left many Americans scratching their heads as to whether Congress is actually attempting to authorize the indefinite detention of Americans by the military without charges. But proponents — led by Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) and Carl Levin (D-Mich.), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee — say that is exactly what the war on terror requires. They argued that the bill simply codifies precedents set by the Supreme Court and removes uncertainty, which they said would better protect the country.

Here is John McCain justifying sending Americans to Guantanamo:

 

(As Emptywheel and Glenn Greenwald note, the White House has believed for many years that it possessed the power to indefinitely detain Americans)

But that’s not all.

The government can also kill American citizens. For more than a year and a half, the Obama administration has said it could target American citizens for assassination without any trial or due process.

But now, as shown by the debates surrounding indefinite detention, the government is saying that America itself is a battlefield.

AP notes today:

U.S. citizens are legitimate military targets when they take up arms with al-Qaida, top national security lawyers in the Obama administration said Thursday.

***

The government lawyers, CIA counsel Stephen Preston and Pentagon counsel Jeh Johnson … said U.S. citizens do not have immunity when they are at war with the United States.

Johnson said only the executive branch, not the courts, is equipped to make military battlefield targeting decisions about who qualifies as an enemy.

The courts in habeas cases, such as those involving whether a detainee should be released from the Guantanamo Bay detention facility in Cuba, make the determination of who can be considered an enemy combatant.

You might assume – in a vacuum – that this might be okay (even though it trashes the Constitution, the separation of military and police actions, and the division between internal and external affairs).

But it is dangerous in a climate where you can be labeled as or suspected of being a terrorist simply for questioning war, protesting anything, asking questions about pollution or about Wall Street shenanigans, supporting Ron Paul, being a libertarian, holding gold, or stocking up on more than 7 days of food.

And it is problematic in a period in which FBI agents and CIA intelligence officials, constitutional law expert professor Jonathan Turley, Time Magazine, Keith Olbermann and the Washington Post have all said that U.S. government officials “were trying to create an atmosphere of fear in which the American people would give them more power”, and even former Secretary of Homeland Security – Tom Ridge –admits that he was pressured to raise terror alerts to help Bush win reelection.

And it is counter-productive in an age when the government – instead of doing the things which could actually make us safer – are doing things which increase the risk of terrorism.

And it is insane in a time of perpetual war.

And when the “War on Terror” in the Middle East and North Africa which is being used to justify the attack on Americans was planned long before 9/11.

And when Jimmy Carter’s National Security Adviser told the Senate in 2007 that the war on terror is “a mythical historical narrative”. And 9/11 was entirely foreseeable, but wasn’t stopped. Indeed, no one in Washington even wants to hear how 9/11 happened, even though that is necessary to stop future terrorist attacks. And the military has bombed a bunch of oil-rich countries when it could have instead taken out Bin Laden years ago.

As I noted in March:

The government’s indefinite detention policy – stripped of it’s spin – is literally insane, and based on circular reasoning. Stripped of PR, this is the actual policy:

  • If you are an enemy combatant or a threat to national security, we will detain you indefinitely until the war is over
  • But trust us, we know you are an enemy combatant and a threat to national security

See how that works?

And – given that U.S. soldiers admit that if they accidentally kill innocent Iraqis and Afghanis, they then “drop” automatic weapons near their body so they can pretend they were militants – it is unlikely that the government would ever admit that an American citizen it assassinated was an innocent civilian who has nothing at all to do with terrorism.

 

Source: https://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/12/americans-are-military-targets-in-the-war-on-terror.html

Filed Under: Martial Law, Military, Politicians, Prison, Protests, Social Unrest, Surveillance, Terrorism, Torture, Tyranny, USA Tagged With: ,

‘Battlefield’ Today: Congress Unveils 53 ‘Jihadist’ Plots Since 9/11

December 3, 2011 By 1 Comment

US is facing a spike in homegrown jihadist-inspired terrorist activity, research by Congress says. It seems that a new bill that allows for Americans to be held for terrorism-related charges and detained without trial will not go to waste.

The Congressional Research Service (CRS) report, released November 15, has criticized President Obama’s domestic Countering Violent Extremism strategy (CVE) saying “the Administration’s CVE strategy lacks specifics” including only “general philosophical statements and the insistence that the strategy does not center solely around fighting one particular radical ideology.”

As of December 3, American counter-terrorist strategy is very specific, targeting Americans with all available military might. Under the new bill, Americans can be arrested, detained, tortured and interrogated without charge or trial. The bill was passed through the Senate on December with overwhelming support from 93 per cent of lawmakers.

The report, largely overlooked by the media, seems to have conveniently been conducted prior to the vote for the new legislation, as if to inspire support. It warns of a “spike” of homegrown terrorist activity in the US.

Altogether since September 11, 2001, CRS estimates that there have been 53 homegrown violent jihadist plots or attacks, with 32 people arrested between 2009 and 2011. Two of those plots resulted in attacks that killed 14 people.

The report titled American Jihadist Terrorism: Combating a Complex Threat defines the term “jihadist” as “radicalized individuals using Islam as ideological and/or religious justification for their belief in the establishment of global caliphate,” a jurisdiction governed by a Muslim civil and religious leader known as a caliph.

According to CRS most of the 2009-2011 homegrown plots “likely reflect a trend in jihadist terrorist activity away from schemes directed by core members of significant terrorist groups such as Al-Qaeda.”

This means homegrown violent jihadists are acting on their own accord, without coordination and support from international terrorist networks. That results in a number of conventional shortcomings, such as lack of “deep understanding of specialized tradecraft such as bomb making.” Financing, training camps and support networks are also unavailable to American jihadists; all of that keeps them from independently engaging in large-scale suicide strikes.

The report says that because of these limitations, homegrown jihadists are likely to turn to violence that requires less preparation, “such as assaults using firearms.” This new strategy pose challenges for law enforcement, intelligence and security officials who detect and investigate terrorist activity in the US.

An airline bombing attempt by Farouk Abdulmutallab, aka “the underwear bomber”, “shoe bomber” Richard Reid, and the perpetrators of the Transatlantic Airlines plot of 2006 are not addressed in the report because it does not study terrorist activity against the US conducted by foreigners, only the “homegrown” variety.

 

Source: https://rt.com/news/us-homegrown-violent-jihadists-935/

Filed Under: Law, Military, Politicians, Politics, Prison, Rights, Torture, Tyranny, USA Tagged With:

Do Not Be Deceived: S. 1867 Is The Most Dangerous Bill Since The Patriot Act

December 2, 2011 By Leave a Comment

Recently I reported on the highly controversial bill S. 1253, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for the fiscal year of 2012 which was introduced back in June.

This bill was replaced by the one introduced on the 15th of November, S. 1867. Today Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky and Senator John McCain of Arizona faced off on the floor ofthe Senate over a proposed amendment to S. 1867.

The minimal coverage this bill is getting in the corporate-controlled establishment media, especially when it comes to the massive danger it poses to everything America was built upon, is nothing short of deplorable.

This amendment would, according to Senator Paul, put “every single American citizen at risk.” Paul rightly pointed out that if the amendment were to pass, “the terrorists have won.”

I couldn’t agree more and this is the major fact that McCain and far too many others in Washington seem to miss. Or, equally likely, McCain and others are well aware of the erosion of civil liberties and have no interest in stopping it.

After all, it isn’t the sycophantic corrupt politicians in Washington that have to endure being groped by TSA goons or surreptitiously blasted with X-Rays by a passing DHS van; it is everyday Americans like you and me that are subjected to such absurd “counterterrorism” measures.

John McCain is a man who revels in death and suffering in true sociopathic style: joking about bombing Iran, calling for military operations in Syria, and supporting the murderous and thoroughly racist al Qaeda-affiliated Libyan rebels.

McCain is the epitome of Washington doublethink: in Libya, al Qaeda is good. Yet, is al Qaeda still the biggest threat to humanity, so much so that it justifies turning the entire world into a theater of war in which all rights are suspended in the name of the war on terror?

Senator Paul argued against the amendment to S. 1867 that McCain co-sponsored by saying, “Should we err today and remove some of the most important checks on state power in the name of fighting terrorism, well then the terrorists have won. [D]etaining American citizens without a court trial is not American.”

Unfortunately, the PATRIOT Act has already removed “some of the most important checks on state power in the name of fighting terrorism,” but there are very few politicians who will put their careers on their line in saying this fact.

McCain quickly attempted to defend the amendment he’s been peddling on the Senate floor by saying, “Facts are stubborn things. If the senator from Kentucky wants to have a situation prevail where people who are released go back in to the fight to kill Americans, he is entitled to his opinion.”

This is the typical, “Either you’re with us, or you’re with the terrorists,” fallacious logic employed by those in Washington who will take every opportunity to exploit the non-threat of terrorism as a method of control and erosion of civil liberties.

McCain, who is the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, is a member of the camp of individuals who either lie on a regular basis while knowing the facts, or are so deluded and removed from reality that they actually fear the al Qaeda bogeyman.

Senator McCain, just like the non-profit groups that are directly linked to the Department of Homeland Security, promotes a fear of terrorism that is completely at odds with the facts, using this climate of fear and paranoia to justify otherwise unacceptable legislation like S. 1867 and the PATRIOT Act.

McCain’s proposed amendment would allow the executive branch, which has already murdered American citizens abroad without so much as a single charge, to have power over whether a suspect is put through the civilian court system or through the military tribunal system.

Military tribunals are the complete antithesis of the civilian justice system, and putting American citizens through such a system would signal the death of everything the American justice system was built upon.

The most dangerous aspect of S. 1867 is not only that it could subject American citizens to military tribunals and detention, but also that individuals could be imprisoned indefinitely without charge or trial.

Even if this was not used on American citizens, it represents a deplorable move that would only make the rest of the world hate us that much more, knowing that it is explicitly allowed for the American government to snatch up people and detain them forever without charge or trial.

If any other government were to even consider engaging in such behavior, people like Hillary Clinton who laughably claim to support human rights, would likely decry such moves.

Yet, the nonsensical logic of American exceptionalism makes people like McCain think that America has the right to operate outside of the rule of law (not to mention common decency and respect for other human beings) at home and abroad, so long as it is supposedly to combat terrorism.

Senator Paul countered McCain’s absurd assertion by saying, “I don’t think it necessarily follows I am arguing of the release of prisoners. I am simply arguing that particularly American citizens should not be sent to a foreign prison without due process.”

It amazes me that any such thing would have to even be argued. The Constitution is supposed to protect us from such egregious breaches of our inalienable rights; and our so-called representatives take an oath to protect the Constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic.

It is now clear that the true enemies of the Constitution, the ones that truly put our liberties in danger, are domestic.

They wear expensive suits and happily stroll through the halls of power in Washington, seemingly confident that they will not be treated as the traitorous criminals that they are.

McCain is one of these traitors who are launching an all-out assault on our way of life and our civil rights, S. 1867 is just the most recent, and most virulent, manifestation of this.

“An individual, no matter who they are, if they pose a threat to the security of the United States of America, should not be allowed to continue that threat,” McCain said in defense of his attack on our rights.

“We need to take every stop necessary to prevent that from happening, that’s for the safety and security of the men and women who are out there risking their lives … in our armed services,” McCain added.

The real people who put the men and women in our armed services at risk are warmongers like McCain who happily put Americans in the line of fire in order to keep their war profiteering croniessatisfied.

44 Republican Senators and 15 Democrats along with one Independent voted to keep the new detainee provisions in the NDAA, with Senator Paul and Senator Mark Kirk of Illinois being among the few Republicans who broke party ranks and sided with a majority of Democrats who voted to block the new provisions.

Paul argued, “If these provisions pass, we could see American citizens being sent to Guantanamo Bay,” while Republican Senator Lindsey Graham countered, “To be clear: These provisions do not apply to U.S. citizens.”

Did that stop the American government from murdering a citizen of the United States in Yemen in a drone attack?

No, in fact, the National Security Council’s secret death panel makes these decisions outside of all legislation and accountability, so Graham’s claim that it wouldn’t apply to American citizens is hollow, at best.

A couple of days ago Glenn Greenwald, a journalist for Salon and a former Constitutional and civil rights lawyer tweeted a very similar sentiment:

With very few exceptions, the McCain-Levin bill, awful though it is, doesn’t create any powers beyond what the O[bama] Admin[istration] thinks it now has.

The problem is that this bill would make it explicitly legal for the United States to conduct the horrific operations they have already been carrying out.

If this were to pass, there would be absolutely nothing standing in the way of the governmentrounding up dissidents who they could easily label terrorists or individuals planning/supporting terrorism (given the absurdly broad definition used).

They could then imprison them without charge or trial for however long they please, and if they have their way, they would be able to openly torture them, not just the torture deceptively labeled “enhanced interrogation” but torture that can go by no other name.

Of course, that is not to diminish the fact that the tactics now employed by the CIA and others are indeed torture. Just ask people like conservative radio host Mancow who was waterboarded and came to the conclusion that it is indeed torture after having held the complete opposite opinion previously.

Or if that isn’t enough proof, take the Vanity Fair article written by Christopher Hitchens in which he describes his experience being waterboarded which brought him to the exact same conclusion: waterboarding is torture.

Even Bahrain ostensibly has more democratic accountability for torture, although I think we all know that is about as legitimate as calling waterboarding “enhanced interrogation.”

McCain laughably claimed that the changes would “help defend our nation against the threat posed by al Qaeda while upholding our values and honoring our Constitution.”

This is especially hilarious given that McCain said that the al Qaeda-affiliated Libyan rebels “inspired the world” in carrying out their bloody revolution.

Does McCain actually believe that he has the power to pick and choose when individuals and groups directly linked to al Qaeda are good or bad?

How can they actually reconcile such absurdist moral relativism? Personally, I don’t think that McCain can actually believe the things he says unless he has actually been able to eliminate every bit of sense and logic that is innate in human beings.

To the many people commenting and emailing me claiming that this is overblown and it will not apply to American citizens, you might want to listen to Republican Senator Lindsey Graham’s own words on the Senate floor.

“In summary here, [section] 1032, the military custody provision, which has waivers and a lot of flexibility doesn’t apply to American citizens. [Section] 1031, the statement of authority to detain does apply to American citizens, and it designates the world as the battlefield including the homeland,” Graham said.

Is there really anything even remotely unclear here? Our government is making the final strides towards turning the brutal military apparatus that has slaughtered so many people abroad in the name of “freedom” back to our own people.

What we are witnessing now is truly historic, the American government is trying to explicitly codify the ability to detain Americans without trial or charge in a military facility under military rule with military tribunals.

While I argue that we already live in a police state, based on the citizen spying programs, ludicrous amounts of domestic surveillance, collection and storage of massive amounts of biometric information, and the Department of Homeland Security’s invisible surveillance state (just to mention a few) the passage of this bill would bring about a new dangerous paradigm in America.

Even if it was sold as something that wouldn’t apply to American citizens, like the PATRIOT Act was sold as a counterterrorism bill, it would undoubtedly be used against us regardless of these claims, just as the PATRIOT Act has been utilized in cases wholly unrelated to terrorism.

Even the officials from the Department of Justice readily admit that the PATRIOT Act is being used against non-terrorist American citizens.

Is anyone really naïve enough to believe that the government will actually restrict the usage of S. 1867 to terrorists and not Americans who stand up to their corrupt, out of control, and wholly illegitimate criminal government?

To make matters even worse, the usage of drones in the United States is being considered by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).

The Los Angeles Times recently reported that the FAA plans to propose new rules this coming January, which would give free license to police departments and other domestic agencies to use them in the United States.

Yet, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), or drones, have been used by law enforcement in the United States for some time now.

In fact, The Washington Post reported on the usage of aerial drones domestically in January of this year along with Homeland Security News Wire.

Currently, law enforcement agencies supposedly have to seek out emergency authorization from the FAA to use drones, which, according to The Washington Post is “only occasionally” granted.

The new FAA regulations coupled with turning the United States into a battlefield in which all Americans could be enemy combatants is dangerous, to say the least.

Given the fact that our current administration under the traitorous warmonger Barack Obama has no problem killing children with drones abroad, do we really think that they wouldn’t conduct such operations at home?

To an administration that commits extrajudicial executions of American citizens – and their 16-year-old child who was born in Denver, Colorado – is anything off the table?

The unfortunate and thoroughly disturbing reality is that our government has no problem carrying out such operations and S. 1867 would just make it that much easier by codifying it and creating an explicit legal apparatus through which they can operate.

I highly recommend that you explore at least some of the 344 proposed amendments for S. 1867 in the Library of Congress’ Thomas system which can be found here.

You can track all of the updates on the act with the amendments organized by date on this Library of Congress page.

As you can tell, the 28th was by far the busiest day so far in the life of S. 1867 with over 100 amendments considered in that single day, although this very well might be beat in coming days when our so-called representatives continue to debate turning the United States into a giant battlefield.

UPDATE: If the ridiculous assault on our inalienable rights embodied by S. 1867 wasn’t enough, the Senate is also considering repealing the anti-torture measures currently in place (lax though they may be).

This flies in the face of the fact that torture does not provide actionable intelligence or anything even remotely reliable unless you’re looking for a false confession to anything from terrorism to the assassination of Abraham Lincoln.

This bill must be stopped if we want to preserve anything that America is supposed to stand for. The PATRIOT Act was a crippling blow to the Constitution but S. 1867 would be the death of every last bastion of hope and freedom that was left after the vicious attacks on our civil liberties that have brought us to this point.

Source: https://www.activistpost.com/2011/12/do-not-be-deceived-s-1867-is-most.html

Filed Under: Law, Politicians, Politics, Prison, Torture, Tyranny, USA Tagged With:

Afghan Woman’s Choice: Marry Rapist Or Stay In Jail

December 2, 2011 By 1 Comment

This story is both outrageous and terribly sad.

Three weeks ago I wrote here about Gulnaz, a 19-year-old Afghan woman who was raped by her cousin’s husband, then charged with adultery and finally sentenced to 12 years in prison. Her baby girl, born following the rape, is serving her sentence with her.

The European Union commissioned Development Pictures to produce a documentary highlighting women’s rights issues in Afghanistan, but subsequently suppressed it for political reasons. The documentary tells Gulnaz’s story.

Gulnaz To Be Freed, But Must Marry Her Rapist

Now comes the news that Gulnaz is set to be freed, but only after agreeing to marry the man who raped her.

You read that right: President Hamid Karzai ordered Gulnaz to be released on condition that she agreed to become the second wife of her rapist – a prospect that supporters say she had dreaded.

The Afghan President got involved in the case of Gulnaz when the decision not to broadcast the film led to a storm of publicity, including a Care2 petition with over 90,000 signatures.

So first the 19-year-old is raped and becomes pregnant. This makes her guilty of adultery under Afghan law, and she is sentenced to 12 years in jail. As a final indignity, she can leave jail only by marrying her rapist. But it gets worse.

“He Had Filthy Clothes On…He Shut Me Up By Putting His Hands On My Mouth”

From CNN:

Even two years later, Gulnaz remembers the smell and state of her rapist’s clothes when he came into the house when her mother left for a brief visit to the hospital.

“He had filthy clothes on as he does metal and construction work. When my mother went out, he came into my house and he closed doors and windows. I started screaming, but he shut me up by putting his hands on my mouth,” she said.

After the attack, she hid what happened as long as she could. But soon she began vomiting in the mornings and showing signs of pregnancy. It was her attacker’s child.

In Afghanistan, this brought her not sympathy, but prosecution. Aged just 19, she was found guilty by the courts of sex outside of marriage — adultery — and sentenced to twelve years in jail.

The only way around the dishonor of rape, or adultery in the eyes of Afghans, is to marry her attacker. This will, in the eyes of some, give her child a family and restore her honor. In order that she may stay with her child, Gulnaz is willing to do this.

Gulnaz Faced A Stark Choice

Gulnaz had a stark choice to make. Women in her situation are often killed for the shame their ordeal has brought the community. She is at risk, some say, from her attacker’s family. And her case is common to many women in Afghanistan.

Under Afghan law, Gulnaz has been judged an adulterer. Despite the ongoing dispute over her story, her predicament has not changed. She faced the hideous choice of 12 years in jail or marriage to her rapist and the risk of death.

Source: https://www.care2.com/causes/afghan-womans-choice-marry-rapist-or-stay-in-jail.html

Filed Under: Afghanistan, Rights, Tyranny, Violence, Women Tagged With: , ,
« Older Posts
Newer Posts »